WASSMER ET AL.: SOUTH-CENTRAL FLORIDA BOBCAT ECOLOGY 195

pattern of movements of her radio-collared young (M5, M6, F8) indicated that
she was probably still in the area through February 1980. Her range is shown
in Figure 3C as similar to that of the previous period based on radio locations
through mid-November, and she is shown as present in the same general area
in Figures 3D and 4A. Following the death of M3, M1 expanded his range,
probably to overlap or include that of F3 (Fig. 3D), as F3 is assumed to have
remained in her former range until February 1980. Thus, during 17 January-5
February 1980 M1's range probably overlapped all or major portions of the
ranges of three adult females (Fl, F3, F4), two of which (Fl, F3) had young. It
may be significant that while the range of male M1 was superimposed on those
of more than one female, the greatest overlap was with the female Fl, with
which he was originally associated.
 Although the ranges of given males and females overlapped and both
individuals were known to use the same places within the common area,
observations indicated that for the most part they did not visit the same sites at
the same time, i.e. they were spatially associated but tended to be temporally
isolated. However, males and females were occasionally located in close
proximity, if not actually together. Instances of such close association were
recorded in every month of the year except June and July, during which time
less radiotracking was done and fewer marked male/female combinations were
present in the population. These data indicate that adult males and females
with overlapping ranges did associate, if only infrequently, outside of the
breeding season.
 Observations suggested that the male of a pair may keep other males from
 a female with small young. During the night of 5 April 1981, an adult male
 (M6) adjacent to the M8/F1 range (Fig. 5C) was located less than 200 m from
 the den of F1 with her recently-born litter. After spending about 2 hours in the
 area of the den, he moved about 1 km SSE, passing through the area near the
 cottage where F1 was occasionally fed and which was one of her preferred rest
 areas. During the night of 8-9 April, he also passed within 0.5 km of the den.
 Immediately following M6's appearance in the vicinity of the den and cottage,
 M8 began to concentrate his activity in these areas, moving through and resting
 in them during the day and night. Although no actual contact between the two
 males was documented, it is possible that M8's behavior was a response to the
 presence of M6 in the vicinity of the den and may have served to discourage
 further visits by M6 to the den area. Lembeck (1986) reported several cases
 where males (sometimes more than one) were in close proximity to a female
 for a few days following parturition.
 The adult male also may promote the dispersal of older juveniles. When
 not in the area of the den or cottage, M8 could usually be found moving along
 the periphery of other portions of his and Fl's shared range, particularly in the
 area apparently used by an older kitten of F1 that was still in the natal range.
 On four of five days during the first two weeks of April that the juvenile was